IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Why the RFC series is important

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 26 May 2020 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CFAD3A0B0F for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 61iCiLU7GRhy for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4CC13A0AF7 for <Rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id m7so9316361plt.5 for <Rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5X4MN43eh+Hp/AM425SGunMtMypvgbGcYDMYp82Jlh4=; b=T4+uR/LB9wKi8QfPwpo+6CQkKfvX7ZbhM9BGzSf9+zuOT4RG2y0/PmxidmlDiHKahh 93neiI8uLRFVpE9V1JtS9GcihKT7EeVOKCbXknlaZPpW9HJghE/vIR4avBkvp6dM9bP8 hzkHD8isKYIo7Yqm4wC7rOqK/yIG/hiaW8aIH6e6Vlt9JNm3OL1Nc+kFv+Di6uU1Ifx8 ZqT5UP5jMkTMBx0z/b6YjMUeKV2qjEgLFQrbNfbBxdjTaa/IKYL0kiPb6uNyenXrcpD0 J3VZxlRorDbbwKHgsV6Kb2LMk42jbKXQueiWAVFsf6O6EcsszW32X1D/0saBM0RHhD5e qQmQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5X4MN43eh+Hp/AM425SGunMtMypvgbGcYDMYp82Jlh4=; b=kPBH4z2p0o8JzJgbKILR50BdYqIJcMAOzu06LocJNHdhXx95ub/mU6Pw7r6c9tQd06 avGc3jdryBDX/y1qfRCHrmacrnLzNux0/Nez5pIQjar/uM1+NS44/+/FJ0gxJPDTT1sf oeh5um3V0iFGYahXUW68oTypFvUY2xe3XNtTR3hDsWTL1LtAS1nrf2C5N7TBStNWVUfi 1UYDZ9VmCbJNDBBk4XRzKjAMbU5JFCQmOrqES7agEcsPI8SWBdrkSpKyvRaGeCTqG0L9 5qMmjKxdRTGfmHPF9S0po4HiJDcBQ93sx5lVCoirXnUMdFcooQSKdMMIoeQUxGuW+K0G Yn2w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Rp5seTqlq3EPY4KbgwnnXR+k68HOd6q9PsRxSugux7ZzAOdkW HTWTNXiFOvmdCkDbDJaVrkIDIObu
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzrCY4jTpuWPSFyGqrjNtgJ6D6NDa+/AVKyUQ1AcYc3aed2DJ3F6jTyfMhitvX+UlWiekwMrg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4c0f:: with SMTP id na15mr1523287pjb.112.1590532837280; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.12.178]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 136sm454397pfa.152.2020.05.26.15.40.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 26 May 2020 15:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
Cc: Rfced-future@iab.org
References: <alpine.OSX.2.22.407.2005251504530.26397@ary.qy> <821BC38D-97E3-4976-8571-1427CF747627@tzi.org> <CCC5BE38-626B-4132-A20E-079E2AE2396D@csperkins.org> <alpine.OSX.2.22.407.2005261707100.31277@ary.qy>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <97a12212-c935-00b1-305d-a1e7d83c04b6@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 10:40:31 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.22.407.2005261707100.31277@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/C_tZbs7hiyTbhjCNCPSOxs4RGMc>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Why the RFC series is important
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 22:40:40 -0000

On 27-May-20 09:09, John R Levine wrote:
> On Tue, 26 May 2020, Colin Perkins wrote:
>> This is the real problem – not whether the revision to RFC XXXX is called RFC YYYY or RFC XXXX.v2.
> 
> The specs for a mail server or a DNS server are spread across dozens of 
> RFCs and errata.
> 
> Do you foresee an approval process lightweight enough that we could sweep 
> all of the DNS specs into 1034bis or all of the mail specs into 5321bis 
> and 5322bis?

This really was addressed in depth quite some years ago:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-newtrk-repurposing-isd-04

The short answer is no, the process would not be lightweight, and no, the IETF would not sweep all the specs for a complex system into a couple of RFCs. But the IETF would attempt to document the complexity.

And there are examples, which happen to cover part of the mail system:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-newtrk-sample-isd-00

For our present purposes, IMHO the RFC Series should be willing to support such a mechanism, if and only if the IETF is willing to make the effort.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email